that make the claimant’s truthfulness highly probable, this is a matter for his independent judgment. In cases of homicide, however, ruling on this basis is the position of most scholars, including al-Shāfiʿī and Ahmad. And Allah knows best.

He—may Allah have mercy on him—was asked:

A man owns a slave whom he alleges stole some of his belongings. The slave states that he deposited them with his former master, wrapped in a kerchief. Is his statement concerning this to be accepted? What must be done in this matter?

He replied:

By the consensus of the Muslims, no action may be taken solely on the slave’s statement, whether the official adjudicating between them is a military governor or a judge. Rather, the majority of jurists hold that, when someone is suspected of theft or a similar offence, his character must be examined. He may be known for wrongdoing, or his character may be unknown. If he is known for righteousness, it is not permissible to proceed against him or punish him. Scholars hold two views on whether he must swear an oath. Some also hold that whoever levels the accusation against him should receive a discretionary punishment.

If his character is unknown, he is to be detained until his circumstances are investigated. One view is that he should be detained for a month; another is that the duration is left to the ruler’s judgment. This is based on the report in the Sunan collections, narrated by Bahz ibn Hakīm, from his father, from his grandfather:

“The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, detained someone on suspicion.”